A "slip of the tongue" by the Prince of Wales has raised the question of his
wife’s title when he becomes king. Gordon Rayner examines the
country’s likely reaction.

Can two such innocuous words ever have held such far-reaching implications for the future of the Royal family? By suggesting that the Duchess of Cornwall “could be” Queen Camilla when he becomes king, the Prince of Wales managed the astonishing feat of sparking a controversy that knocked even Prince William and Kate Middleton off the front pages last week.

His off-the-cuff comment, made during an interview with the American broadcaster NBC that was shown on Friday night, was immediately spun by his closest aides as a slip of the tongue, made when he was “caught unawares” by an unexpected question.

Yet the Prince is hardly a novice when it comes to television interviews, and he is well aware that the official line on his wife’s status is that she will be his Princess Consort. Could it be that the Prince deliberately used the opportunity to test the water of public opinion on an issue that is close to his heart?

Regardless of his intentions, the Prince has made it as clear as the Cullinan diamond that his one-time mistress could become Britain’s first queen consort since the late Queen Elizabeth was crowned in 1937. But will she?

“There is no constitutional reason why the Duchess of Cornwall shouldn’t be crowned queen,” says Sarah Richardson, associate professor of history at Warwick University. “There is no law that says a divorcée is excluded and, of course, Charles was himself divorced from Diana.

Related Articles

“Ever since Henry VIII got divorced, constitutionalists have tended to shy away from worrying about the issue of divorce. It all boils down to whether something is acceptable in the prevailing public opinion of the day. For example, Edward VIII did not have to abdicate for a constitutional reason, he abdicated because Wallis Simpson was considered unsuitable by the government.”

The Church of England is also “relaxed” about the prospect of two divorcees being crowned, one senior Anglican source said yesterday, as the Church’s priority is to preserve the Act of Settlement, which bans Catholics from the throne, rather than objecting to a consort being given a particular title.

The very fact that the Duchess is being talked about as a future Queen Camilla is a quantum leap forward from the position as recently as five years ago, when the Prince married the then Camilla Parker Bowles in a civil ceremony at Windsor Guildhall.

At the time, the very suggestion that “the Rottweiler”, as Diana called her, could become queen was so unthinkable that New Labour came up with the “Princess Consort” title to head off an anticipated public outcry.

The popular perception of the Duchess was still largely shaped by the Princess of Wales’s loathing for her and the infamous “Camillagate” tapes, in which the Prince’s cringingly explicit pillow talk, recorded by a phone tap, had been printed verbatim in tabloid newspapers. Moreover, she was described by Mark Bolland, the Prince’s former private secretary, as “monumentally lazy”, and one of her own family was reported as having described her as “the laziest woman to have been born in England in the 20th century”. An opinion poll taken at the time of the couple’s marriage showed that 73 per cent of Britons rejected the idea of the Duchess ever becoming queen.

Fast forward to 2010 and David Cameron left little doubt at the weekend that while the subject of future titles would be “discussed and debated”, he would give his blessing to a joint coronation if the Prince became king on his watch.

“I’m a big Camilla fan,” he said. “I think the country is getting to know her and getting to see that she is a very warm-hearted person with a big sense of humour and a big heart.”

Over the past year I have had opportunities to watch the Prince and the Duchess at work, and I have no doubt the vast majority of those who have met the Duchess would agree. All members of the Royal family have to be able to chat to dozens, if not hundreds of strangers on a daily basis as they carry out their public engagements, but the Duchess has a particular ability to connect with them, having spent the majority of her life as a private citizen.

Royal reporters like to claim that they have a special shorthand symbol for the phrase “down to earth”, a description almost universally applied to the Duchess by those who have met her, as they discover that she likes a good natter, just like the rest of us (as well as a glass of red wine and the occasional cigarette).

She also loves a joke and isn’t afraid to hoot with laughter, often at her own expense. (During a tour of India last month, as she sweltered in 40C heat, the Duchess admitted to reporters that she had only herself to blame, because in a typical fit of Britishness, she had put on tights under her trousers.)

The fact that she has managed to endear herself to so many by being so open, without committing anything that could go down as a Duke of Edinburgh-style gaffe, sums up exactly why she has been the ideal consort, so far, to the Prince of Wales. The Prince’s reputation for being difficult and aloof has also, in a roundabout way, enhanced his wife’s reputation, in the same way that voters admired Sarah Brown for being able to handle her surly husband Gordon.

The Duchess has even managed quietly to shake off her reputation as the “Duchess of Dolittle”, steadily increasing the number of public engagements she undertakes, from 137 in 2007 to 252 last year.

Privately, the Prince has always been determined that the woman he loves should be known as queen, and Clarence House is at pains to point out that while “it remains our intention” that the Duchess be known as Princess Consort, a crucial caveat is that “we have always said that any final decision will have to be made at the time”.

Lord St John of Fawsley, the constitutional expert to whom the nation always turns in times of crisis, laughs off the suggestion that the Duchess would be known as Princess Consort.

“She will become queen, there is no doubt of that at all,” he said. “I can see no reason why she shouldn’t be queen and every reason why she should. She has been very sensible, she doesn’t throw her weight around, and people have taken to her. I think the public would be rather annoyed if she didn’t become queen, and the Queen herself wouldn’t want her to be denied the title.”

Gyles Brandreth, the former Conservative MP and biographer of the Prince, agrees: “There’s no question that she will be queen. She is already Princess of Wales, though she doesn’t use the title for PR reasons, but by the time the Prince of Wales becomes king, which will probably be in 15 years or so, those sensitivities will be further down the road. I don’t think people will be uncomfortable with it at all.”

But even if the public do accept the Duchess’s right to become queen, royal advisers will have a raft of ticklish questions to address before they commit to giving her the title. Will the Royal family be strengthened by a divorced mother becoming queen? If the public like the Duchess because of her down-to-earth style, would a coronation undo all her good work? Does the Duchess herself want the title?

Dr Richardson believes it’s all down to timing. “The longer Charles has to wait to become king, the easier it will be for Camilla to take on the title of queen,” she says. “Longevity always helps monarchies; controversies fade, public opinion changes and people will just become used to the idea of her as queen.”